, PhD, Executive Professor, Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, USA
, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, USA
Public goods are indispensable for producing value in an economy and their usage is part of resource consumption in by any business. Of the two types of public goods , natural ones and social ones, it has mainly been the natural resources, which caught the attention of politicians, academics and business alike. And it is only the natural public goods like, e.g., air and water, for which attempts have been made to develop monetary valuation. This is changing as the Internet gets into focus. The various concerns taken up increasingly by policy makers on many issues of the Internet lead to a discussion that is increasingly questioning whether Internet provision really is a public good, if it really is for free, how it can be governed, whether Internet provision can be monetized and how this monetization changes the public goods character of the Internet. It is the purpose of this paper to discuss these topics. One outcome that is sought is to define the societal mandate of the parties involved, which would be to create private economic gain and public welfare. This social mandate must encompass the topic of business accountability − otherwise there will be no social effect from including as many users in Internet access as possible or feasible. Developing a society that is inclusive would be one major objective of conducting stakeholder relations in an ethical manner.
Keywords: public goods, Internet, social impact, business ethics, accountability, stakeholder relations, monetization, inclusiveness.
JEL Classification: H41, A13, M2, M41.
Cite as: Bardy, R., Rubens, A. (2019). The Public Good of Internet Usage and its Social Impact: A Business Ethics Approach. Business Ethics and Leadership, 3(2), 63-71. http://doi.org/10.21272/bel.3(2).63-71.2019.
- AACSB (2016). AACSB Announces Collective Vision for the Future of Business Education. Retrieved from: https://www.aacsb.edu/newsroom/2016/4/aacsb-announces-collective-vision-for-the-future-busines-education.
- Bardy, R., and Massaro, M. (2013). Shifting the paradigm of return on investment: a composite index to measure overall corporate performance. Corporate Governance, 13(5), 498-510.
- Broeders, D. (2015). The public core of the internet. An international Agenda for Internet Governance. The Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy. Amsterdam: University Press.
- Brouwer, R., and Pearce, D. (2005). Cost-benefit analysis and water resources management. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Bruns, A. (2012). Reconciling community and commerce? Collaboration between produsage communities and commercial operators. Information. Communication and Society, 15(6), 815-835.
- Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang.
- Buchanan, J.M. (1968/1999). The Demand and Supply of Public Goods, The Collected Works of James M. Buchanan, Vol. 5. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc.
- Budzinski, O., and Stöhr, A. (2018). Competition policy reform in Europe and Germany − Institutional change in the light of digitization. Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers, No. 117. Ilmenau, Germany: Technische Universität.
- Coulson, A. B., Adams, C. A., Nugent, M. N., and Haynes, K. (2015). Exploring metaphors of capitals and the framing of multiple capitals: Challenges and opportunities for< IR>. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(3), 290-314.
- Deibert, R. and Rohozinski, R. (2011). Liberation versus Control: The Future of Cyberspace. Journal of Democracy, 21(4), 43-57.
- Deng, F. F. (2003). Collective goods and the political hold-up problem. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 159(2), 414-434.
- DFID (Department for International Development, 1999). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. London: Department for International Development.
- Dill, A., and Gebhart, N. (2016). Redundancy, Unilateralism and Bias beyond GDP-results of a Global Index Benchmark. MPRA Paper 74268. Munich: Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
- Fisk, M. (2000). Surviving with dignity in a global economy: the battle for public goods. Anton, A., Fisk, M., and Holmstrom, N. (eds.), Not for sale: In defense of public goods. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, pp. 41-63.
- Freeman, A.M., Herriges, J.A., and Cling, K. L. (2014). The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values. Theory and Methods, 3rd edition. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
- Frischmann, B. M. (2012). Infrastructure: The social value of shared resources. Oxford University Press.
- Fuchs, C. (2007). Internet and society: Social theory in the information age. NY: Routledge.
- Grootaert, C. (1998). Social Capital: The Missing Link? The World Bank Social Capital Initiative, Working Book # 3. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
- Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243-1248.
- Harper, R., and Kelly, M. (2003). Measuring Social Capital in the United Kingdom. (U.K.) Office for National Statistics.
- Hazlett, T. W., & Bittlingmayer, G. (2003). The political economy of cable open access. Stanford Technology Law Review, 7(1), 4-18.
- Herman, C. (2003). Becoming Digital: Empowerment, Identity and Community ICTs. Mortberg, C., Elovaara, P. and Lundgren, A. (eds.), How do we make a difference? Information Technology, Transnational Democracy and Gender. Lulea, Sweden: Lulea University of Technology, pp. 237-250.
- Holcombe, R. G. (1997). A theory of the theory of public goods. The Review of Austrian Economics, 10(1), 1-22.
- Krol, E. (1992). The Whole Internet. O’Reilly and Associates, Inc., Sebastopol, CA.
- Levenburg, N. M. (2005). Delivering customer value online: Practices, applications, and performance. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 12(5), 319-331.
- MacKie-Mason, J.K., and Varian, H.R. (1995). Pricing the internet. Kahin, B., and Keller, J.H. (eds.), Public access to the Internet: Harvard: MIT Press, pp. 269-314.
- Maine, Henry Sumner (1963). Ancient Law: Its Connection with the Early History of Society and its Relation to Modern Ideas; With Introduction and Notes by Frederick Pollack, Boston: Beacon Press (reprint of 1861 ed.).
- McCormack, K. P., and Johnson, W. C. (2016). Supply chain networks and business process orientation: advanced strategies and best practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
- Murphy, K. (2012). The social pillar of sustainable development: a literature review and framework for policy analysis. Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy, 8(1), 15-29.
- Noddings, N. (2000). Education as a Public Good. Anton, A., Fisk, M., and Holmstrom, N. (eds.), Not for sale: In defense of public goods. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, pp. 279-293.
- OECD (2001). Policies to enhance sustainable development. Paris: OECD Publishing.
- Ostrom, E. and Hess, C. (2007). Private and Common Property Rights. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1304699.
- Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Robertson, S. L., and Verger, A. (2012). Governing education through public private partnerships. Ginsburg, M., Robertson, S., Mundy, K., Verger, A., and Menashy, F. (eds.). Public private partnerships in education: New actors and modes of governance in a globalising world. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 21-42.
- Samuelson, P. A. (1995). Diagrammatic exposition of a theory of public expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 37(4), 350-356.
- Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure. The review of economics and statistics, 36(4), 387-389.
- Schepp, N.P., and Wambach, A. (2016). On Big Data and its Relevance for Market Power Assessment. Journal of European Competition Law and Practice, 7(2), 121-129.
- Sharma, A. (2017). Digitalisation in the UK Service Industries. Vienna: ZSI Centre for Social Innovation.
- Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I., and Gross, B. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170.
- Sigma Guidelines (2003). Putting Sustainable Development into Practice – A Guide for Organisations. London: British Standards Institution (BSI).
- Soyka, P. A. (2013). The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) integrated reporting framework: toward better sustainability reporting and (way) beyond. Environmental Quality Management, 23(2), 1-14.
- Steets, J. (2004). Developing a framework: Concepts and research priorities for partnership accountability. Global Public Policy Institute Research Book Series, No. 1. Berlin: Global Public Policy Institute.
- Unerman, J., and Bennett, M. (2004). Increased stakeholder dialogue and the internet: towards greater corporate accountability or reinforcing capitalist hegemony? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(7), 685-707.
- United Nations, International Monetary Fund, Commission of the European Communities–Eurostat, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, World Bank (1993). System of National Accounts 1993, New York: United Nations.
- Von Krogh, G., and Spaeth, S. (2007). The open source software phenomenon: Characteristics that promote research. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16(3), 236-253.
- World Bank Social Capital Initiative (1998). The initiative on defining, monitoring and measuring social capital: overview and program description. Social Capital Initiative Working Paper no. 1. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
- Wu, F., Mahajan, V., and Balasubramanian, S. (2003). An analysis of e-business adoption and its impact on business performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing science, 31(4), 425-447.
- Ziewitz, M. and Brown, I. (2014). A Prehistory of Internet Governance. I. Brown, I., (ed.) Research Handbook on Governance of the Internet, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 3-26.